Open as +3 underdogs at Purdue
- Thread starter Mr Wickerpark
- Start date
Northwestern brings back a scrappy team that won a bowl but wants more.
They can get more with Geico if that’s what they want.
It will be interesting to see how the line moves once camp opens and speculation on Thorson’s status kicks into high gear. I think the Cats and points is a pretty high percentage position at this point.
Northwestern brings back a veteran team that won a bowl but wants more. Big difference.
Home field is worth what 3 points so they are saying with the CT uncertainty it is basically a tossup
1) I was being snarky.
2) Per Bill Connelly’s “returning production” measure, NU is returning 64% (67% offense, 61% defense) and Purdue is returning 59% (77% offense, 41% defense). So sure NU is the more veteran team but not by that much. For context in the Big Ten, MSU returns the most at 92% and Indiana returns the least at 49%.
There are no doubt some very big statistical shoes to fill (Jackson, Igwebuike, Queiro, etc.), but I'm pretty confident in our replacements, who have themselves played a pretty significant amount of football for us.
Not all that much of a question mark based on what I’m hearing.
So we are basically both bringing back the teams from last year? The team that beat them by 10? The same game we lost our starting corner when they had to go for it on 4th down using a fake?
I'll take it.
Agree. Starting as dogs can only help. Fitz will play the disrespect card from Day 1 in camp.
Hope we have a decent purple turnout for this one. The wife and I will be there, along with several STH friends.
I am the eternal pessimist. We may lose
BUT
I @#$&! HATE when a team that has sucked for 15 years gets a new coach, has a mediocre year and is immediately given a trajectory past us.
I'll keep saying it - winning a lot of games still counts, right?
BUT
I @#$&! HATE when a team that has sucked for 15 years gets a new coach, has a mediocre year and is immediately given a trajectory past us.
I'll keep saying it - winning a lot of games still counts, right?
Yes, but so does a blowout loss to Duke in Week 2 last year and losses to Western Michigan and Illinois State to start 2016.
Can’t expect much Week 1 respect when you perform like that in the past two seasons. I hope Fitz’s commitment to this is as strong as he makes it seem.
Those losses are incredible frustrating. The ISU one mind boggling. At least Western went on to be undefeated in the regular season against essentially no one very good.
I would love to think that some how they pinpointed what went wrong preparation wise for the games. The Duke game I think I have a satisfactory answer but the other two.
The game is played on the field. Just because someone thinks they may be in a position to beat us in week one doesn't mean the game does not still need to be played. Till then, both teams have the same record
Generally Fitz has had the team ready to play in week one. Sometimes there has been a letdown in week 2
This is blatantly false in the past two years.
Nevada was up 20-17 with less than 6 minutes left in the game Week 1 last year. If memory serves, Thorson had to punch it in on 4th down at the goal line to retake the lead. That is scarily close to a redux of the Western Michigan game.
Losing 41-17 to Duke and simply losing to ISU speak volumes for recent Week 2s.
Heck, NU started 0-2 in 2014, with losses to Cal and Northern Illinois.
The win over Stanford in 2015 is starting to look more and more like the exception to a trend. I don’t think the narrative that Fitz is a master Week 1 planner holds up like it used to.
True, but I don't see how it could be rated a tossup if it was know Thorson was 100 percent. NU beat them last year and has as much or more coming back this year. Obviously, Purdue is more than capable of winning the game, but Northwestern with a healthy Thorson should be a solid favorite. The Boilers are getting an awful lot of love based on last year. Some of that is justified, but we'll see how they do with three guys returning on defense.
Well, Fitz is 10-2 in openers. I think would take than for every week of the season.
IMO last year's slow start is an outlier and can totally be hung on the decision to experiment with the OL way too close to opening day. An OL needs stability to function as a unit and Fitz was very open about how he was mixing things up. That mixing up should have been all done during spring ball if you wanted a cohesive unit. The offense was stuck in the mud and it was discouraging to the whole team. Eventually they found their way and to that degree the experiment may have worked but too late for Wisconsin and certainly too late for Duke and even Nevada.
So far I haven't heard the same BS about the OL. OTOH, I haven't read anything about how they are building some great unity either. The past couple of years we have heard how then Sky Team spent all kinds of extra time together and I think it helped them through some real adversity. I'd like to think that the OL as a unit has been digging deep this past of season due to all the flack they got last year.
And how do you explain 2016’s 0-2 start? Or was that an outlier too?
https://www.insidenu.com/2016/9/13/...ve-line-illinois-state-blake-hance-eric-olson
I’m sorry, but just saying “10-2” in openers is not enough for me when the team is 2-2 in the past four years. And also 1-3 in Week 2.
Prove me wrong.
But we do not know that CT is 100% or even for sure going to play. Beginning to look like we will have him but still don't know for sure and even if we have him, how sharp he will be. As far as returning a lot more, not so sure. On D yes(but there are some big shoes to fill. But we are also starting a couple new coaching assistants on D, notably DBs and LB and it may or may not be an issue in the first game. The PU-3 would seem about right considering the uncertainty. Hopefully we make them choke on that line
Last edited:
I saw the five projected Oline starters together at an outing at Lincoln Park Zoo if that will help you.
Can we please let the ISU debacle go? It was Imo the worst loss of the decade, but reliving this nightmare as an example of how we suck to start a year is really no different than someone hanging their hat on the Stanford win as the reason we are great to start the year. They are both part of a larger sample of work. Facts are, Fitz is 10-2 in Openers. That is his body of work. It’s easy to cherry pick on both sides of the argument. For instance, we may conclude that Fitz is great in bowl games winning 3 of the last 4. I would say he is improving in bowl games, but the whole body of work still shows a losing record.
I am going to start with the premise that betting lines are set to make people bet, and therefore try to reflect what bettors think will happen. Therefore, bettors think we will lose by three. If you think that these same bettors are thinking "hmm, Fitz hasn't had his teams ready and they crap their pants in week one and two", then ok, I accept this.
If it is more of the "Purdue is up and coming based one one barely successful year and will beat a consistently solid team with good returning talent" , then I call BS. I think ANY OTHER 10 win P5 team is favored over PU in this.
I have no explanation for 2016. I only know that in 2017 Fitz was openly messing with the starting line up and people I know who know Offensive lines tell me that it takes time to build a unit that can perform together. Maybe he was messing with the line in 2016 too but didn't publicize it.
It helps me
. Hopefully it helps them. Let me know if it is the same five that start agains Purdue.
I'd like to place a bet. I think the team comes out prepared and unafraid of Purdue. If the odds were good enough I'd even bet on a shut out. I think our D is going to be overwhelming for many of the teams we face. Of course if the odds were good enough I'd bet on a lot of things.
Similar threads
